Thank you very much. I am trying to read German and Austrian press regularly but I did not come across such report. The newspaper from Salzburg published this information based on Austrian ORF tv.
I will read your post with interest. Thank you.

I was told once by senior security agency official that actually Hillary Clinton could deal with ISIS. If she would have been able to respond the way she wanted the tragedy of Benghazi could have been avoided. But Donald Trump may not have understanding and be willing to listen to his advisors. I do not know whether this is true. What do you think?

Yes, I agree. This is consequence of US Administration’s decision regarding Iraq. I would add also other states which withdrew their armies from Iraq prematurely. What’s more nobody seems to even think (in Europe or elsewhere beyond USA) about possible intervention to destroy ISIS simultaneously in the Middle East and North Africa...

If you believe Russia Wiki - good luck! No, they did not return. He told about it for Radio Svoboda. Yes, Mr. Navalny page is good for some information but it may not be sufficient for everyone.

Everyone can challenge usage of Prominent. He was prominent since his work and opinions are source for many Western experts in Russia. He was considered an expert on the Kremlin regime. He was often correct in his predictions regarding nominations in Kremlin. I do not see any reason to challenge accuracy of the description of his figure on Russian political scene as a prominent.

Thank you for critical reading of the article. I am still convinced it provides the best information you can find in English.

There will be a problem with establishing of a real cause of his death unless someone saw something or heard. It is not a murder like in a case of Mrs Politkovskaya... I think the regime has learnt its lesson.

I found this article on death of prominent Russian critic the most informative. The circumstances of his death do not appear as if it would be a sort of violence. But the context of his work as an author and chronicler of Russian politics may suggest otherwise...

It depends what does “news source” mean for you. For me it is news source since they have quite good expertise on Communist China (interview with dissidents and extra info - they have people speaking in Mandarine (who are analazing the Communist propaganda-look at their Notes section) and watching closely situation there). They also seem to add to information which they quote. In this case they add extra info on the source. This article is based on a report.

Several sources in Russian press has indicated that some kind of change is coming. Yes, it is very difficult to judge the direction of the next turn. It may be that the true will be directed as Golitsyn once predicted...

In 2002 Russians tried to discredit Litvinenko with the same claim. Yes, Litvinenko was also owed by FSB not a small money. Theft is probably the least problem of Kremlin’s regime.
So it is worthy to think twice or maybe more...
I do not agree generally with Russian’s claims on anything. I have reservation to comments in media as well.
Karpichkov brought important info on Russian regime - historic and current information. There was an attempt on his life this is why he is under protection and changed name.
You are obviously free to put your faith in Moscow. if you reject an evidence which Litvinenko provided, then I am not sure what other evidence can convince you. Maybe one Putin will volunteer and tell you “I did it”. But I am not sure...

It is good to know, think and discuss. I am not forcing anyone to believe in it. I have just provided link. And yea, I have been thinking about such a possibility... It is not unimaginable knowing what it was already done by Kremlin. This list is very long...

Zero hedge is a good source on certain topic from the area of economy. Unfortunately if it comes to foreign politics ZH seems to follow “economic guru” Mr. Kaiser from Russia Today, Mr. Patrick Buchanan and other useful idiots. I should say “very, very” useful idiots from Kremlin’s point of view.

I think this reveals more about the nature of the Kremlin's methods used in its foreign policy. It is probably not shocking for long-term observers but nevertheless it shows once again cruelty of the regime.

it is hard to find anywhere such an eloquent answers on the crucial issues regarding our, Western, situation in relation to Islam. West has been thrown (or threw itself) into the Islamic world also through its not perfectly designed immigration policies.

Turnbull questioned terrorist character of ISIS and suggested “exaggerations”when other ministers (for example Foreign Minister Julie Bishop) revealed that there is chemical weapon available to them. He was the go-guy for any media show on appreciation of Islam. This is about Islam and in consequence also on reception of Muslim refugees (Tony Abbott wanted to receive mainly persecuted minorities such as Yazzidis and Christians).

The point is to not to confuse the essence of the Soviet state (current Russia) with the United States or even with pre-bolsheviks Russia. Not a form (i.e. Great Game) determines the outcome but architects (players). Bolshevik system is unique in its hostility towards humanity, personal liberties and republic. Bolsheviks designed the plan to destroy the West out of hatred (vide: Soviet plans of nuclear destruction of major European capitals). So the Great Game may be a part of current political scenario, I agree, but this article discusses primarily players rather than the game. Especially great game.

It is often assumed that Putin and his cohorts are interested only in personal wealth and expansion of Moscow's power for the same purpose. This essay written on the anniversary of Yanaev's putsch in Kremlin debates this argument.

Only 3 days before the Malaysian flight was shot down, a military cargo plane was shot down at an altitude of 21,000 feet in this area. That is well beyond the range of manpads and should be considered high altitude.

This is from Business Insider based on Reuters (I can't find this particular wire): "Since the beginning of the fighting in Ukraine, 10 aircraft (five Mi-24 Hind, two Mi-8 Hip helicopters, one An-2, one An-30 and the Il-76 at Luhansk) have been shot down by the local militia using portable surface-to-air missile systems."

IL-76 was downed shortly after take off from Luhansk.

Another source says explains that on June 6 terrorists shot down AN-30. link But the fligh path of the Malaysian plane was few miles away from Luhansk.

Why are you using the word terrorist?

I could use word "criminals" in regard to these bands but I think the more adequate word is terrorists sponsored by Kremlin/GRU (as everybody knows).

This is also completely untrue. They didnt do anything at all to lead it outside of the dangerous area, the path is a straight line right over the center of rebel controlled territory. The costs for a slight diversion around it would have been minimal  the warzone is a truly tiny portion of Ukraine.

The flight path was not secretly designed. I would encourage you to read the official pre-report by the Dutch investigators. It is written that the flight path was considered as safe according to the international aviation standards. This is what I meant when I said "they did everything what they could to provide security".

Sending the flight over the warzone defied common sense and was partially to blame for the tragedy.

On this altitude nothing happened before in this area. Until the moment of tragedy/crime the cruising altitude was considered safe by international community.